Lombardi G, Gallagher J, Gennis P
Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY.
JAMA. 1994 Mar 2;271(9):678-83.
To determine survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in New York City and to compare this with other urban, suburban, and rural areas.
Observational cohort study.
New York City.
Consecutive out-of-hospital cardiac arrests occurring between October 1, 1990, and April 1, 1991.
Trained paramedics performed immediate postarrest interviews with care providers, using a standardized questionnaire.
Entry criteria, elapsed time intervals, and nodal events conformed to Utstein recommendations. The single target end point was death or discharge home.
Of 3243 consecutive cardiac arrests on which resuscitation was attempted, 2329 (72%) met entry criteria as primary cardiac events. Overall survival was 1.4% (99% confidence interval [CI], 0.9% to 2.3%). No patients were lost to follow-up. Survival from witnessed ventricular fibrillation was 5.3% (99% CI, 2.9% to 8.8%). Using survival from witnessed ventricular fibrillation for intersystem comparison, our survival rate was similar to that of Chicago, Ill (4.0%; 99% CI, 1.9% to 7.5%; P = .41), the only other large city on which data were available. However, it was significantly lower than that reported from midsized urban/suburban areas (33.0%; 99% CI, 30.4% to 35.6%; P < .0001) and suburban/rural areas (12.6%; 99% CI, 8.9% to 16.3%; P < .0001). Survival rate among arrests occurring after arrival of emergency medical services personnel (8.5%; 99% CI, 4.7% to 14.0%) was comparable with Chicago (6.6%; 99% CI, 3.3% to 11.5%; P = .41) but markedly lower than King County, Washington (36%; 99% CI, 28.6% to 43.8%; P < .0001).
Survival from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest in New York City was poor. This was partly attributable to lengthy elapsed time intervals at every step in the chain of survival. However, examination of survival among arrests occurring after emergency medical services arrival suggests that other features may predispose residents of large cities to higher cardiac arrest mortality than individuals living in more suburban or rural settings. Since half the US population resides in large metropolitan areas, this represents a public health problem of considerable magnitude.
确定纽约市院外心脏骤停患者的生存率,并与其他城市、郊区和农村地区进行比较。
观察性队列研究。
纽约市。
1990年10月1日至1991年4月1日期间连续发生的院外心脏骤停患者。
训练有素的护理人员使用标准化问卷对护理提供者进行骤停后立即访谈。
入选标准、经过的时间间隔和节点事件符合Utstein建议。单一目标终点为死亡或出院回家。
在3243例连续尝试复苏的心脏骤停患者中,2,329例(72%)符合入选标准,为原发性心脏事件。总体生存率为1.4%(99%置信区间[CI],0.9%至2.3%)。无患者失访。目击心室颤动后的生存率为5.3%(99%CI,2.9%至8.8%)。使用目击心室颤动后的生存率进行系统间比较,我们的生存率与伊利诺伊州芝加哥市相似(4.0%;99%CI,1.9%至7.5%;P = 0.41),芝加哥是唯一有可用数据的其他大城市。然而,该生存率显著低于中型城市/郊区(33.0%;99%CI,30.4%至35.6%;P < 0.0001)和郊区/农村地区(12.6%;99%CI,8.9%至16.3%;P < 0.0001)报告的生存率。紧急医疗服务人员到达后发生的心脏骤停患者的生存率(8.5%;99%CI,4.7%至14.0%)与芝加哥相当(6.6%;99%CI,3.3%至11.5%;P = 0.41),但明显低于华盛顿州金县(36%;99%CI,28.6%至43.8%;P < 0.0001)。
纽约市院外心脏骤停患者的生存率较低。这部分归因于生存链中每个环节经过的时间较长。然而,对紧急医疗服务到达后发生的心脏骤停患者的生存率检查表明,其他因素可能使大城市居民比生活在郊区或农村地区的人更容易发生更高的心脏骤停死亡率。由于美国一半的人口居住在大都市地区,这是一个相当严重的公共卫生问题。